W. J. Hamilton, Researches in Asia Minor, Pontus, and Armenia (London, 1842), i. 393-395; H. F. Tozer, Turkish Armenia and Eastern Asia Minor, pp. 59 sq., 66-78; W. M. Ramsay, “Historical Relations of Phrygia and Asia Minor,” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, N.S. xv. (1883) pp. 113-120; G. Perrot et Ch. Chipiez, Histoire de l'Art dans l'Antiquité, iv. 623-656, 666-672; K. Humann und O. Puchstein, Reisen in Kleinasien und Nordsyrien, pp. 55-70, with Atlas, plates vii.-x.; E. Chantre, Mission en Cappadoce, pp. 3-5, 16-26; L. Messerschmidt, The Hittites, pp. 42-50; Th. Macridy-Bey, La Porte des Sphinx à Eyuk, pp. 13 sq. (Mitteilungen der Vorderasiatischen Gesellschaft, 1908, No. 3, Berlin); Ed. Meyer, Geschichte des Altertums,2 i. 2. pp. 631 sq.; J. Garstang, The Land of the Hittites (London, 1910), pp. 196 sqq. (Boghaz-Keui) 256 sqq. (Eyuk). Compare P. Jensen, Hittiter und Armenier, pp. 165 sqq. In some notes with which my colleague Professor J. Garstang has kindly furnished me he tells me that the two animals wearing Hittite hats, which appear between the great god and goddess in the outer sanctuary, are not bulls but certainly goats; and he inclines to think that the two heaps on which the priest stands in the outer sanctuary are fir-cones. Professor Ed. Meyer holds that the costume which the priestly king wears is that of the Sun-goddess, and that the corresponding figure in the procession of males on the left-hand side of the outer sanctuary does not represent the priestly king but the Sun-goddess in person. “The attributes of the King,” he says (op. cit. p. 632), “are to be explained by the circumstance that he, as the Hittite inscriptions prove, passed for an incarnation of the Sun, who with the Hittites was a female divinity; the temple of the Sun is therefore his emblem.” As to the title of “the Sun” bestowed on Hittite kings in inscriptions, see H. Winckler, “Vorläufige Nachrichten über die Ausgrabungen in Boghaz-köi im Sommer 1907,” Mitteilungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft zu Berlin, No. 35, December 1907, pp. 32, 33, 36, 44, 45, 53. The correct form of the national name appears to be Chatti or Hatti rather than Hittites, which is the Hebrew form (חתי) of the name. Compare M. Jastrow, in Encyclopaedia Biblica, ii. coll. 2094 sqq., s.v. “Hittites.”
An interesting Hittite symbol which occurs both in the sanctuary at Boghaz-Keui and at the palace of Euyuk is the double-headed eagle. In both places it serves as the support of divine or priestly personages. After being adopted as a badge by the Seljuk Sultans in the Middle Ages, it passed into Europe with the Crusaders and became in time the escutcheon of the Austrian and Russian empires. See W. J. Hamilton, op. cit. i. 383; G. Perrot et Ch. Chipiez, op. cit. iv. 681-683, pl. viii. E; L. Messerschmidt, The Hittites, p. 50.
In thus interpreting the youth with the double axe I agree with Sir W. M. Ramsay (“On the Early Historical Relations between Phrygia and Cappadocia,” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, N.S. xv. (1883) pp. 118, 120), C. P. Tiele (Geschichte der Religion im Alterturm, i. 246, 255), and Prof. J. Garstang (The Land of the Hittites, p. 235; The Syrian Goddess, p. 8). That the youthful figure on the lioness or panther represents the lover of the great goddess is the view also of Professors Jensen and Hommel. See P. Jensen, Hittiter und Armenier, pp. 173-175, 180; F. Hommel, Grundriss der Geographie und Geschichte des alten Orients, p. 51. Prof. Perrot holds that the youth in question is a double of the bearded god who stands at the head of the male procession, their costume being the same, though their attributes differ (G. Perrot et Ch. Chipiez, Histoire de l'Art dans l'Antiquité, iv. 651). But, as I have already remarked, it is unlikely that the same god should be represented twice over with different attributes in the same scene. The resemblance between the two figures is better explained on the supposition that they are Father and Son. The same two deities, Father and Son, appear to be carved on a rock at Giaour-Kalesi, a place on the road which in antiquity may have led from Ancyra by Gordium to Pessinus. Here on the face of the rock are cut in relief two gigantic figures in the usual Hittite costume of pointed cap, short tunic, and shoes turned up at the toes. Each wears a crescent-hilted sword at his side, each is marching to the spectator's left with raised right hand; and the resemblance between them is nearly complete except that the figure in front is beardless and the figure behind is bearded. See G. Perrot et Ch. Chipiez, Histoire de l'Art dans l'Antiquité, iv. 714 sqq., with fig. 352; J. Garstang, The Land of the Hittites, pp. 162-164. A similar, but solitary, figure is carved in a niche of the rock at Kara-Bel, but there the deity, or the man, carries a triangular bow over his right shoulder. See below, p. [185].
With regard to the lionesses or panthers, a bas-relief found at Carchemish, the capital of a Hittite kingdom on the Euphrates, shows two male figures in Hittite costume, with pointed caps and turned-up shoes, standing on a crouching lion. The foremost of the two figures is winged and carries a short curved truncheon in his right hand. According to Prof. Perrot, the two figures represent a god followed by a priest or a king. See G. Perrot et Ch. Chipiez, Histoire de l'Art dans l'Antiquité, iv. 549 sq.; J. Garstang, The Land of the Hittites, pp. 123 sqq. Again, on a sculptured slab found at Amrit in Phoenicia we see a god standing on a lion and holding a lion's whelp in his left hand, while in his right hand he brandishes a club or sword. See Perrot et Chipiez, op. cit. iii. 412-414. The type of a god or goddess standing or sitting on a lion occurs also in Assyrian art, from which the Phoenicians and Hittites may have borrowed it. See Perrot et Chipiez, op. cit. ii. 642-644. Much evidence as to the representation of Asiatic deities with lions has been collected by Raoul-Rochette, in his learned dissertation “Sur l'Hercule Assyrien et Phénicien,” Mémoires de l'Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, xvii. Deuxième Partie (Paris, 1848), pp. 106 sqq. Compare De Vogüé, Mélanges d'Archéologie Orientale, pp. 44 sqq.
The name 'Athar-'atheh occurs in a Palmyrene inscription. See G. A. Cooke, Text-book of North-Semitic Inscriptions, No. 112, pp. 267-270. In analysing Atargatis into 'Athar-'atheh ('Atar-'ata) I follow E. Meyer (Geschichte des Altertums,2 i. 2. pp. 605, 650 sq.), F. Baethgen (Beiträge zur semitischen Religionsgeschichte, pp. 68-75), Fr. Cumont (s.v. “Atargatis,” Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft, ii. 1896), G. A. Cooke (l.c.), C. P. Tiele (Geschichte der Religion im Altertum, i. 245), F. Hommel (Grundriss der Geographie und Geschichte des alten Orients, pp. 43 sq.), Father Lagrange (Études sur les Religions Sémitiques,2 p. 130), and L. B. Paton (s.v. “Atargatis,” J. Hastings's Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics, ii. 164 sq.). In the great temple at Hierapolis-Bambyce a mysterious golden image stood between the images of Atargatis and her male partner. It resembled neither of them, yet combined the attributes of other gods. Some interpreted it as Dionysus, others as Deucalion, and others as Semiramis; for a golden dove, traditionally associated with Semiramis, was perched on the head of the figure. The Syrians called the image by a name which Lucian translates “sign” (σημήιον). See Lucian, De dea Syria, 33. It has been plausibly conjectured by F. Baethgen that the name which Lucian translates “sign” was really 'Atheh (עתה), which could easily be confused with the Syriac word for “sign” (אהא). See F. Baethgen, op. cit. p. 73. A coin of Hierapolis, dating from the third century a.d., exhibits the images of the god and goddess seated on bulls and lions respectively, with the mysterious object between them enclosed in a shrine, which is surmounted by a bird, probably a dove. See J. Garstang, The Syrian Goddess (London, 1913), pp. 22 sqq., 70 sq., with fig. 7.
The modern writers cited at the beginning of this note have interpreted the Syrian 'Atheh as a male god, the lover of Atargatis, and identical in name and character with the Phrygian Attis. They may be right; but none of them seems to have noticed that the same name 'Atheh (עתה) is applied to a goddess at Tarsus.
As to Isis see Plutarch, Isis et Osiris, 16. As to Demeter see Homer, Hymn to Demeter, 231-262; Apollodorus, Bibliotheca, i. 5. 1; Ovid, Fasti, iv. 547-560. As to Thetis see Apollonius Rhodius, Argon, iv. 865-879; Apollodorus, Bibl. iii. 13. 6. Most of these writers express clearly the thought that the fire consumed the mortal element, leaving the immortal. Thus Plutarch says, περικαίειν τὰ θνητὰ τοῦ σώματος. Apollodorus says (i. 5. 1), εἰς πῦρ κατετίθει τὸ βρέφος καὶ περιῄρει τὰς θνητὰς σάρκας αὐτοῦ, and again (iii. 13. 6), εἰς τὸ πῦρ ἐγκρυβοῦσα τῆς νυκτὸς ἔφθειρεν ὂ ἦν αὐτῷ θνητὸν πατρῷον. Apollonius Rhodius says,
ἡ μὲν γὰρ βροτέας αἰεὶ περὶ σάρκας ἔδαιεν νύκτα διὰ μέσσην φλογμῷ πυρός.
And Ovid has,
“Inque foco pueri corpus vivente favilla Obruit, humanum purget ut ignis onus.”